Wolfville- why not ban everything

At a recent Wolfville council meeting a presentation was made by CABUM [well named- it stands for the Citizens Allied to Ban Uranium Mining] urging Wolfville to petition the province to stop uranium mining in the province. There is at present a provincial moratorium on uranium exploration but this is not good enough for this group.

At least we can be happy there was some minimal discussion at the table over the proposal with several councillors asking to hear an opposing view. But some people don’t want to hear anything but their side of the story. Perhaps they are afraid their view will change? And we know who they are don’t we.

Bill Zimmerman pointed out to his fellow councillors that council had never asked the tobacco companies to offer an opposing opinion when council unanimously approved the Smoke-free Indoor Public Places By-law several years ago.

What kind of an argument is that? We have always done it this way -only hearing one side and the one we like – why stop now. It wouldn’t have helped of course to have another view with the group at table then; they didn’t listen to the RCMP guy for example who as much as told them they couldn’t enforce the no smoking in the cars with kids by-law. But Mr. Z knows that there is now a more balanced and representative bunch at the Council table who he has to bully.

David Mangle got upset, noting that information has been available for decades about the negative impact uranium can have. He called it incomprehensible that anyone was not informed. [link to source]

Upset is a mild description. This man is supposed to be a conciliator and conflict management expert? Perhaps conflict avoidance expert. Deny conflict and it doesn’t exist and you have instant (but artificial) consensus.

In our view the anti exploration position is a “not in my backyard” position. Uranium is used for beneficial things too, radio isotopes used for all kinds of imaging tests being one of them, and there is a shortage. Let them mine it somewhere else, eh?

But pros and cons of exploration aside, would it have hurt to have heard an other view? What were Mr. Mangle and Mr. Zimmerman and Mayor Stead afraid of. If their position was so convincing and indisputable would not the result among reasonable people after hearing from another viewpoint be the same? And if then the decision to petition the province had passed with full debate -as it did at Kings County Council- would this not have been better than a result which appears to have been one sided as opposed to a consensus? In our view yes, but this is not the way these two councillors and the mayor are used to doing things. It shows that we can have no trust in them, when other issues arise which are less indisputable than this one, to listen to anything but their own narrow, self righteous, and ideological position.